Extending permitted development rights
for homeowners and businesses
Technical consultation

November, 2012
Department for Communities and Local Government

ÂŠ Crown copyright, 2012
Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under
the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy
Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk.
This document/publication is also available on our website at www.communities.gov.uk
Any enquiries regarding this document/publication should be sent to us at:
Department for Communities and Local Government
Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU
Telephone: 030 3444 0000
November, 2012
ISBN: 978-1-4098-3694-0

Contents
Introduction

2

The consultation process and how to
respond

4

Policy context

6

Legal background

6

Proposals for change

7

Benefits and impacts from our proposals

12

Consultation questions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; response form

13

Consultation information

19

Glossary

20

Annex 1: Consultation stage impact
assessment

21

1

Introduction
1. Under the current system, homeowners wishing to extend their home more than a few
metres from the property’s rear wall have to fill in complicated application forms that can
take eight weeks or longer for the council to consider. The large majority of homeowner
applications are uncontroversial: around 200,000 are submitted each year, and almost 90
percent are approved, in almost all cases at officer level. The application process adds
costs and delays, and in many cases adds little value.
2. We propose to make it quick, easier and cheaper to build small-scale single-storey
extensions and conservatories, while respecting the amenity of neighbours. We estimate
that up to 40,000 families a year wishing to build straightforward extensions will benefit
from our proposals, and will be able to undertake home improvements to cater for a
growing family or look after an elderly relative without unnecessary costs and
bureaucracy. Some 160,000 homeowner applications will continue to be considered
through the planning system as at present, including all the larger, more complex and
controversial cases.
3. These measures will bring extra work for local construction companies and small traders,
as families and businesses who were previously deterred take forward their plans. For
illustration, 20,000 new extensions could generate up to £600m of construction output,
supporting up to 18,000 jobs. In addition, each family who benefits will save up to £2,500
in planning and professional fees, with total savings of up to £100m a year.
4. Permitted development already removes hundreds of thousands of developments from
the planning system every year, benefiting homeowners and businesses of all sizes, and
reducing costs and delays. Extending permitted development rights further will promote
growth, allowing homeowners and businesses to meet their aspirations for improvement
and expansion of their homes and premises.
5. It is of course important to ensure that any impact on neighbours and communities is
acceptable. For this reason, safeguards under planning and other regimes will remain in
place, and the changes to permitted development rights for homeowners and businesses
will not apply in protected areas such as conservation areas, National Parks, Areas of
Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest. These proposals do
not remove the requirement for separate listed building consent.
6. The Government is proposing action in five areas:
•

Increasing the size limits for the depth of single-storey domestic extensions from 4m
to 8m (for detached houses) and from 3m to 6m (for all other houses), in nonprotected areas, for a period of three years. No changes are proposed for extensions
of more than one storey.

•

Increasing the size limits for extensions to shop and professional/financial services
establishments to 100m2, and allowing the building of these extensions up to the
boundary of the property (except where the boundary is with a residential property), in
non-protected areas, for a period of three years.

•

Increasing the size limits for extensions to offices to 100m2, in non-protected areas,
for a period of three years.

•

Increasing the size limits for new industrial buildings within the curtilage of existing
industrial premises to 200m2, in non-protected areas, for a period of three years.
2

â&#x20AC;˘

Removing some prior approval requirements for the installation of broadband
infrastructure for a period of five years.

7. We also wish to explore whether there is scope to use permitted development to make it
easier to carry out garage conversions.
8. Other changes to permitted development are also being taken forward separately:
making it easier for commercial properties to be converted to residential use; and
encouraging the reuse of existing buildings through making changes of use easier.
These changes have been subject to consultation already, so are not included in this
paper.

3

The Consultation Process and How to
Respond
The freeing up of planning regulation to allow homeowners and
businesses to make larger extensions to their homes and business
premises without requiring a planning application, and to allow
quicker installation of broadband infrastructure.
The consultation seeks views on the Governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposals to
amend the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) Order 1995 (as amended) to grant increased
permitted development rights allowing homeowners, shops and
offices to build larger extensions, for industrial premises to construct
larger new buildings within their curtilage, and for quicker installation
of broadband infrastructure.
These proposals relate to England only.

Topic of this
consultation:

Scope of this
consultation:

Geographical
scope:
Impact
Assessment:

A consultation stage impact assessment is attached to this
consultation document.

Basic information
To:

Body/bodies
responsible
for the
consultation:
Duration:
Enquiries:
How to
respond:

This is a public consultation and it is open to anyone to respond. We
would particularly welcome views from:
Local planning authorities
Developers
Businesses
Individuals who may be affected by the changes
Community representatives and parish councils
Department for Communities and Local Government

The consultation begins on 12 November 2012 and ends on 24
December 2012. This is a six week period.
Helen Marks
E-mail: Helen.marks@communities.gsi.gov.uk
By e-mail to: PlanningImprovements@communities.gsi.gov.uk
A downloadable questionnaire form, which can be emailed to us, will
be available on our website.
Alternatively paper communications should be sent to:
Helen Marks
Permitted Development Rights â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Consultation
Department for Communities and Local Government
Zone 1/J3 Eland House
Bressenden Place
London SW1E 5DU

Background
Getting to
this stage:

The current framework for permitted development is contained in the
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order
1995 (as amended).
4

Previous
engagement:

No changes have been made to these parts of the General Permitted
Development Order under this Government.

5

Policy Context
9. The measures outlined in this paper will ease the planning restrictions and costly
bureaucracy that prevents families and businesses from making improvements to their
property. Thousands of people will be helped to move up the property ladder and will be
able to expand their homes to accommodate a growing family or take care of an elderly
relative without having to relocate. Cutting back municipal red tape in this way will help
businesses to grow and thrive, and could provide a particular boost for small traders and
small builders. This continues the Government’s programme of simplifying and
streamlining the planning system and reducing burdens on families and businesses.
10. These added flexibilities will not be at the expense of neighbours and the surrounding
community. Protections which are currently in place, both within the planning system and
in other regimes, will remain, and these changes will not apply in conservation areas,
National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific
Interest.
11. These proposals will also help to provide essential business infrastructure for a modern
economy, and will contribute towards delivery of the Government’s ambition for the UK to
have the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015.

Legal Background
12. The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 1 sets out the changes to land or buildings
which constitute ‘development’ and which are therefore subject to planning control.
However, many types of development have only minor impacts, or impacts which can be
controlled by standard conditions. It would be an unreasonable burden to require
planning applications for these developments, so they are given a national grant of
planning permission via permitted development rights.
13. Permitted development rights are set out in the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended). Schedule 2 contains various Parts,
each of which deals with a different aspect of permitted development. The Parts which
are relevant to this consultation 2 are:
•
•
•
•
•

Part 1 (Development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse)
Part 8 (Industrial and warehouse development)
Part 24 (Development by electronic communications code operators)
Part 41 (Office buildings)
Part 42 (Shops or catering, financial or professional services establishments)

14. The General Permitted Development Order sets out both what is allowed under permitted
development, and any limitations and conditions that apply. Where a proposed
development does not fall within the permitted development limits, this does not mean
1

Town and Country Planning Act 1990, s.55.
A complete and up-to-date version of Part 1 appears in The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)
(Amendment) (England) Order 2008 (SI 2008 No. 2362). The Government has also published Technical Guidance on Part 1;
this is available at http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/100806_PDforhouseholders_TechnicalGuidance.pdf . Complete
and up-to-date versions of Parts 8, 41 and 42 appear in The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)
(Amendment) (England) Order 2010 (SI 2010 No. 654). Part 24 of the General Permitted Development Order was introduced
in England by SI 2001 No. 2718 and amended in 2003 by SI 2003 No. 2155. Statutory instruments are available at
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/
2

6

that the development is not acceptable and cannot be built. It means that an application
for planning permission needs to be made so that the local planning authority can
consider all the circumstances of the case.
15. Permitted development only covers the planning aspects of the development. It does not
remove requirements under other regimes (e.g. building regulations, the Party Wall Act 3
or environmental legislation). While these permitted development rights may apply to
listed buildings outside protected areas, they only grant planning permission and do not
remove the requirement for separate listed building consent.
16. There is already scope for local planning authorities to tailor permitted development
rights to their own particular circumstances. They can be extended by means of local
development orders, following local consultation. Alternatively, if there are genuine local
concerns, councils can consult with the community about whether there are exceptional
circumstances that merit withdrawal of permitted development rights locally using existing
powers known as article 4 directions. 4 The National Planning Policy Framework is clear
that the use of Article 4 directions to remove national permitted development rights
should be limited to situations where this is necessary to protect local amenity or the
wellbeing of the area. 5

Proposals for Change
Increased limits for homeowner rear extensions and
conservatories
17. At present, single-storey rear extensions with a depth beyond the rear wall of 4m for a
detached house, and 3m for any other type of house, are allowed under permitted
development rights, subject to various limitations. 6 To provide greater flexibility for
homeowners who wish to improve and enlarge their properties, we propose that in nonprotected areas these limits should be increased to 8m for a detached house, and 6m for
any other type of house. This would also cover conservatories at the rear of properties.
18. We are not proposing any changes for flats, which do not have permitted development
rights for rear extensions, and are not proposing any changes for extensions of more
than one storey, which under permitted development can have a maximum depth of 3m
beyond the rear wall.
19. To ensure that the amenity of neighbouring properties is protected, other limitations and
conditions would remain the same. For example, development will not be able to cover
more than 50% of the curtilage of the house, single-storey extensions must not exceed
4m in height, and any extensions which have an eaves height of greater than 3m must
not be within 2m of the boundary. In addition, existing protections under other regimes
(building regulations, the Party Wall Act or the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;right to lightâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, 7 for example) will continue
to apply. There is no weakening of the National Planning Policy Framework policies
which aim to prevent garden-grabbing.

3

See glossary.
See glossary.
5
National Planning Policy Framework, paragraph 200.
6
This is set out in Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A, A1(e)(i) of the General Permitted Development Order.
7
See glossary.
4

7

20. The proposals do not grant permitted development rights for the construction of separate
outbuildings for residential accommodation, or for the creation of separate residential
units. They do not reduce the wide range of powers which local authorities have to tackle
the unauthorised ‘beds-in-sheds’ development carried out by a small minority of
unscrupulous landlords. 8
Question 1: Do you agree that in non-protected areas the maximum depth for single-storey
rear extensions should be increased to 8m for detached houses, and 6m for any other type
of house?

Making it easier to carry out garage conversions
21. The Government is keen to support family annexes and is looking at how best to remove
council tax and regulatory obstacles. A live-in annex for immediate relatives such as
teenagers or their elderly grandparents will help increase housing supply and help
ensure the elderly have dignity and security in retirement.
22. The use of existing garages for residential accommodation, where no separate
residential unit is created, 9 does not usually require planning permission, as it does not
constitute ‘development’. Where alterations are made which change the external
appearance, such as the insertion of windows, this may constitute development. In most
cases, these alterations can be carried out under permitted development rights. If there is
a particular local problem with parking, councils may consider exercising an Article 4
direction, provided that there is a clear justification for doing so in accordance with the
National Planning Policy Framework.
23. Local authorities sometimes impose conditions restricting the conversion of garages,
particularly in new developments. Such conditions should not be imposed unless they
are fully justified, for example there is reason to believe that parking problems would
otherwise result. Garages can provide a valuable source of extra space, and wherever
possible, families should be able to adapt them to meet their changing needs.
24. Permitted development rights currently allow for improvements and alterations to
garages, which can facilitate their conversion. 10 This already helps homeowners to
provide extra family accommodation – however, we are keen to explore whether more
could be done.
Question 2: Are there any changes which should be made to householder permitted
development rights to make it easier to convert garages for the use of family members?

8

The Department for Communities and Local Government has published a guide on all the powers councils have to tackle
unauthorised development: Dealing with rogue landlords: A guide for local authorities
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/housing/roguelandlordsguide
9
Whether a separate residential unit is created depends not just on the physical structures involved, but on the way the annex is
used, and by whom – for example, whether the occupant is a close relative, and lives as part of the main household.
10
Under Class A if the garage is an integral part of the house; under Class E if it is a freestanding outbuilding.

8

Increased limits for extensions to shops and
financial/professional services establishments, with
development to the boundary of the premises
25. Shops and financial/professional services establishments are currently able to extend
their premises by up to 50m2, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space
of the original building by more than 25%, and subject to various other limitations. 11 We
propose that outside of protected areas, these limits should be raised to 100m2 and 50%.
This will bring significant benefits for businesses, and will allow them to grow quickly
without the need for costly and time-consuming planning applications. To give
businesses extra flexibility, we also propose that they should be able to build up to the
boundary of the premises, except where the boundary is with a residential property,
when the requirement to leave a 2m gap along the boundary would remain.
26. Other limitations and conditions would remain the same, and existing protections under
other regimes will continue to apply. For example, the height of the building as extended
must not exceed 4m, and the development must not consist of changes to a shop front,
or extensions beyond a shop front.
Question 3: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, shops and professional/financial
services establishments should be able to extend their premises by up to 100m2, provided
that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original building by more than 50%?

Question 4: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, shops and professional/financial
services establishments should be able to build up to the boundary of the premises, except
where the boundary is with a residential property, where a 2m gap should be left?

Increased limits for extensions to offices
27. Offices are currently able to extend their premises by up to 50m2, provided that this does
not increase the gross floor space of the original building by more than 25%, and subject
to various other limitations. 12 We propose that outside of protected areas, these limits
should be raised to 100m2 and 50% in order to provide greater flexibility for business
expansion.
28. Other limitations and conditions would remain the same, and protections under other
regimes will continue to apply. For example, buildings within 10m of the boundary must
not be more than 5m high, in other cases the extension cannot exceed the height of the
existing building, and new extensions must not be within 5m of the boundary.
Question 5: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, offices should be able to extend their
premises by up to 100m2, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space of the
original building by more than 50%?

11
12

This is set out in Schedule 2, Part 42, Class A, A1(a) and (c) of the General Permitted Development Order.
This is set out in Schedule 2, Part 41, Class A, A1(a) of the General Permitted Development Order.

9

Increased limits for new industrial buildings
29. At present, new industrial buildings or warehouses which are up to 100m2 in size can be
built within the curtilage of an existing industrial building or warehouse in a non-protected
area, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original building by
more than 25%. 13 We propose that outside of protected areas, these limits should be
raised to 200m2 and 50%. This will allow these businesses to expand quickly without the
time and expense of going through the planning process. There are already generous
limits for the extension of industrial and warehouse buildings (up to 1,000m2), so no
changes are proposed to those limits.
30. To protect local amenity, other limitations and conditions would remain the same, and
existing protections under other regimes will continue to apply. For example, buildings
within 10m of the boundary must not be more than 5m high, there must be no building
within 5m of the boundary, and there must be no reduction in the space available for
parking or turning of vehicles.
Question 6: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, new industrial buildings of up to
200m2 should be permitted within the curtilage of existing industrial buildings and
warehouses, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original
building by more than 50%?

A time limit on the changes
31. We propose that these changes to permitted development rights should be in place for a
period of three years, starting from the date at which the secondary legislation
implementing these changes comes into force. This is because we recognise that current
economic circumstances require exceptional measures to assist hard-pressed families
and businesses, and to stimulate growth.
32. In order to provide certainty to neighbours and communities, and to make sure that the
three-year window is effective, we propose that developments will have to be completed
by the end of the three-year period. This is different from planning permissions, which
specify a time limit within which the development must commence, but which allow for
completion later. Homeowners and businesses wishing to exercise their rights under
these changes will be required to notify the local planning authority on completion of the
development. Where this notification is not received by the end of the three-year period,
the development will not count as permitted development, and could be subject to
enforcement action.
33. We will keep the impact of these measures, and whether there may be a case for their
continuation at the end of the three-year period, under review.
Question 7: Do you agree these permitted development rights should be in place for a
period of three years?

Question 8: Do you agree that there should be a requirement to complete the development
by the end of the three-year period, and notify the local planning authority on completion?

13

This is set out in Schedule 2, Part 8, Class A, A1(d) of the General Permitted Development Order.

10

Protected areas
34. In order to make sure that there is no adverse impact on protected areas, we propose
that the changes listed above should not apply on ‘article 1(5) land’. 14 The main areas
this covers are:
• National Parks
• Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
• conservation areas
• World Heritage Sites
• the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads
In addition we propose that the changes should not apply on Sites of Special Scientific
Interest.
Question 9: Do you agree that article 1(5) land and Sites of Special Scientific Interest
should be excluded from the changes to permitted development rights for homeowners,
offices, shops, professional/financial services establishments and industrial premises?

Delivery of Superfast Broadband
35. When the permitted development rights were first introduced in 2001, the nature and
needs of the technology and the likely impacts on surrounding areas were still being
explored. Therefore, an approach was taken which combined permitted development
rights with prior approval for certain works in certain areas. At present, under part 24 of
the General Permitted Development Order, fixed broadband apparatus such as cabinets,
telegraph poles, and overhead lines have permitted development rights, which means
they can be installed without the need to apply for planning permission. This is subject to
a prior approval process on article 1(5) land which allows planning authorities to consider
the siting and appearance of communications apparatus before development
commences. These permitted development rights liberalise the planning system and
allow for speedier deployment of communications infrastructure, although the prior
approval process can create uncertainty for developers and prolong the time taken on
installation.
36. We propose to remove this prior approval requirement as it applies to article 1(5) land.
This change will be for a period of five years, and all works will have to be completed by
the end of that period in order to count as permitted development. 15 The Government will
be asking the relevant operators to work with local planning authorities to agree good
practice so that all parties are aware of how and when roll-out will be delivered in their
area, and the principles governing siting and design.
37. There is now a considerable body of experience and good practice in the delivery of this
infrastructure, and it is essential for growth and international competitiveness that we
deliver on our ambition for the UK to have the best superfast broadband network in
Europe by 2015. This will not only boost UK businesses, but will ensure that rural areas
can share the same benefits as cities, and that everyone across the country can be
certain of access to a fast reliable network.

14

‘Article 1(5) land’ refers to types of areas set out in article 1(5) of the General Permitted Development Order.
These proposals relate to the infrastructure used for the fixed broadband service, which does not include masts, certain types
of antenna, public call boxes, radio equipment housing over a certain size and development ancillary to such radio equipment:
see Schedule 2, Part 24, Class A, paragraph A2(4)(b) of the General Permitted Development Order.
15

11

38. The prior approval requirement will continue to apply in Sites of Special Scientific Interest
in order to ensure that these sensitive sites are not damaged.
39. The Electronic Communications Code (Conditions & Restrictions) Regulations currently
require all lines to be placed underground except in certain circumstances such as where
poles already exist, or it is not practical to do so. The Department for Culture, Media and
Sport will be consulting later this month on a proposal to relax the restriction on overhead
lines everywhere except in Sites of Special Scientific Interest.
Question 10: Do you agree that the prior approval requirement for the installation, alteration
or replacement of any fixed electronic communications equipment should be removed in
relation to article 1(5) land for a period of five years?

Benefits and Impacts from our Proposals
40. These proposals will offer benefits to individuals, businesses and the economy as a
whole. Individuals will be able to get on with an extension without needing to go through
the slow and costly process of applying for planning permission, and more people will be
able to properly house their growing families and care for elderly relatives. Savings to
individual homeowners could be up to £2,500, and we estimate that up to 40,000 families
a year could benefit from these savings.
41. Individual businesses will benefit from the freedom to expand and improve their existing
premises. They will be able to grow and thrive without the disruption and cost of
relocating. These measures will also bring extra work to small construction businesses
and traders – approximately 30 jobs are supported for every additional £1m spent on
housing repairs and maintenance. The amount of extra development which will come
forward will depend on how many families and businesses who were previously deterred
by the planning application process now decide to develop. For illustration, 20,000 new
extensions could generate up to £600m of construction output, supporting up to 18,000
jobs.
42. Businesses and communities, particularly in rural areas, will benefit from quicker roll-out
of broadband, and this essential business infrastructure will help to build a modern and
competitive economy.
43. It is important that any impacts on neighbours and communities are minimised.
Protections and limitations, both within the planning system and other regimes (such a
building regulations or the Party Wall Act) will still remain in place, and the changes to
permitted development rights for homeowners, offices, shops, professional/financial
services establishments and industrial premises will not apply in conservation areas,
National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or Sites of Special Scientific
Interest. Larger, more complex and controversial proposals will continue to go through
the planning system to ensure that their impacts can be fully considered.

12

Consultation Questions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Response Form
We are seeking your views to the following questions on the proposals to increase the permitted
development rights for homeowners, businesses and installers of broadband infrastructure.

How to respond:
The closing date for responses is 5pm, 24 December 2012.
This response form is saved separately on the DCLG website.
Responses should be sent to: PlanningImprovements@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Written responses may be sent to:
Helen Marks
Permitted Development Rights â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Consultation
Department for Communities and Local Government
1/J3, Eland House
Bressenden Place
London SW1E 5DU

About you
i) Your details:
Name:
Position:
Name of organisation
(if applicable):
Address:
Email:
Telephone number:
ii) Are the views expressed on this consultation an official response from the
organisation you represent or your own personal views?
Organisational response
Personal views
iii) Please tick the box which best describes you or your organisation:
District Council
13

Metropolitan district council
London borough council
Unitary authority
County council/county borough council
Parish/community council
Non-Departmental Public Body
Planner
Professional trade association
Land owner
Private developer/house builder
Developer association
Residents association
Voluntary sector/charity
Other
(please comment):

iv) What is your main area of expertise or interest in this work?
(please tick one box)
Chief Executive
Planner
Developer
Surveyor
Member of professional or trade association
Councillor
Planning policy/implementation
Environmental protection
Other
(please comment):

Would you be happy for us to contact you again in relation to this questionnaire?
Yes

No

ii) Questions
Please refer to the relevant parts of the consultation document for narrative relating to each
question.

14

Question 1: Do you agree that in non-protected areas the maximum depth for singlestorey rear extensions should be increased to 8m for detached houses, and 6m for any
other type of house?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 2: Are there any changes which should be made to householder permitted
development rights to make it easier to convert garages for the use of family members?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 3: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, shops and professional/financial
services establishments should be able to extend their premises by up to 100m2,
provided that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original building by
more than 50%?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 4: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, shops and professional/financial
services establishments should be able to build up to the boundary of the premises,
except where the boundary is with a residential property, where a 2m gap should be left?
Yes

No

15

Comments

Question 5: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, offices should be able to extend
their premises by up to 100m2, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space
of the original building by more than 50%?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 6: Do you agree that in non-protected areas, new industrial buildings of up to
200m2 should be permitted within the curtilage of existing industrial buildings and
warehouses, provided that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original
building by more than 50%?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 7: Do you agree these permitted development rights should be in place for a
period of three years?
Yes

No

Comments

16

Question 8: Do you agree that there should be a requirement to complete the
development by the end of the three-year period, and notify the local planning authority
on completion?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 9: Do you agree that article 1(5) land and Sites of Special Scientific Interest
should be excluded from the changes to permitted development rights for homeowners,
offices, shops, professional/financial services establishments and industrial premises?
Yes

No

Comments

Question 10: Do you agree that the prior approval requirement for the installation,
alteration or replacement of any fixed electronic communications equipment should be
removed in relation to article 1(5) land for a period of five years?
Yes

No

Comments

Do you have any comments on the assumptions and analysis set out in the consultation
stage Impact Assessment? (See Annex 1)

Yes

No

17

Comments

Thank you for your comments.

18

Consultation Information
About this consultation
Representative groups are asked to give a summary of the people and organisations they
represent, and where relevant who else they have consulted in reaching their conclusions when
they respond.
Information provided in response to this consultation, including personal information, may be
published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes (these are primarily
the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004). If you want the information that you provide to be treated as
confidential, please be aware that under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, there is a
statutory code of practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals, amongst
other things, with obligations of confidence. In view of this it would be helpful if you could
explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a
request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we
cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An
automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded
as binding on the Department.
The Department for Communities and Local Government will process your personal data in
accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and in the majority of circumstances this will
mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties. Individual responses will not
be acknowledged unless specifically requested. Your opinions are valuable to us. Thank you for
taking the time to read this document and respond.
If you have any queries or complaints regarding the consultation process, please contact:
DCLG Consultation Co-ordinator
Zone 6/H10 Eland House
London SW1E 5DU
email: consultationcoordinator@communities.gsi.gov.uk

19

GLOSSARY
Article 4 directions
Article 4 of the General Permitted Development Order allows local planning authorities to
consult with their local communities about whether to withdraw particular permitted development
rights over a specified area. Where an article 4 direction is in place, those permitted
development rights no longer apply, and a planning application must be submitted. Article 4
directions do not affect development which has already been begun or completed under the
permitted development rights.
Guidance on the operation of article 4 directions is available at
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2160020.pdf. This states
that local planning authorities should consider making article 4 directions only in those
exceptional circumstances where evidence suggests that the exercise of permitted development
rights would harm local amenity or the proper planning of the area. While article 4 directions are
confirmed by local planning authorities, the Secretary of State must be notified, and has wide
powers to modify or cancel most article 4 directions at any point.
Curtilage
In general, the curtilage of a house refers to land within the boundaries of the property, including
any closely associated structures and buildings. Precisely what is within the curtilage of a
house will vary depending on the nature of the property in question.
‘Right to light’
The ‘right to light’, which operates separately from the planning system, protects the rights of
owners of buildings with windows which have received natural light for 20 years or more. It will
be important for people thinking of constructing an extension under these proposed changes to
make sure they don’t infringe their neighbours’ right to light.
The Party Wall etc Act 1996
The Party Wall Act provides a framework for preventing and resolving disputes in relation to
party walls and excavations near neighbouring buildings. Anyone intending to carry out work of
the kinds described in the Act must give the Adjoining Owners notice of their intentions. An
Adjoining Owner cannot stop someone from exercising the rights given to them by the Act, but
may be able to influence how and at what times the work is done through the drawing up of a
Party Wall Award. However, if a Building Owner starts work without having first given notice in
the proper way, Adjoining Owners may seek to stop the work through a court injunction or seek
other legal redress.
The Department publishes an explanatory booklet which sets out the rights and responsibilities
of both parties. It also gives information and guidance which individuals may find useful, such
as sample letters. The booklet is available at:
http://communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/partywall

What is the problem under consideration? Why is government intervention necessary?

The policy issue under consideration is whether the thresholds that govern the available permitted
development rights for householder extensions and certain non-domestic extensions and new buildings could
be increased for a limited period. This would allow more development to take place without the requirement for
local authority planning permission and provide an incentive for developers to carry out works in the short
term, rather than delay. There would be benefits for businesses who carry out development and businesses
wishing to expand. There are also potential growth benefits where development takes place that would not
otherwise have done so due to the requirement to obtain local authority planning permission.
Superfast broadband is key to boosting economic growth, increasing competitiveness and creating jobs.
Accordingly, Government has allocated £530 million to help take superfast broadband to rural areas and is
keen to incentivise greater roll out by easing the planning consideration of associated development.
What are the policy objectives and the intended effects?

•
•
•
•
•

A boost for growth by incentivising developers to carry out work in the short term, rather than delaying,
and where development takes place that would not otherwise have done so due to the requirement to
obtain local authority planning permission.
Benefits for businesses who carry out development and businesses wishing to expand. Business will
no longer be required to prepare planning applications for certain development.
Developers will make fee savings from no longer submitting planning applications.
Reducing the need for local authority assessment of development with more limited impacts to allow
them to concentrate on larger development of more strategic benefit to their local area.
Fast track the roll out of superfast broadband.

What policy options have been considered, including any alternatives to regulation? Please justify preferred
option (further details in Evidence Base)

•Option 1 – do nothing: make no changes to permitted development rights.
•Option 2 – deregulate by increasing the permitted development thresholds for householder extensions and
certain non-domestic extensions and new buildings. For broadband deployment, remove the requirement
for prior approval for electronic communications apparatus in protected areas.
Will the policy be reviewed? Yes

If applicable, set review date:

Does implementation go beyond minimum EU requirements?
N/A
Are any of these organisations in scope? If Micros not
Micro
< 20
Small
Large
Medium
exempted set out reason in Evidence Base.
What is the CO2 equivalent change in greenhouse gas emissions?
Traded:
Non-traded:
(Million tonnes CO2 equivalent)
0
I have read the Impact Assessment and I am satisfied that, given the available evidence, it represents a
reasonable view of the likely costs, benefits and impact of the leading options.

Signed by the responsible Minister:

Date:

21

Evidence Base (for summary sheets)
The planning system provides a mechanism through which the impacts and
external costs of development to third parties can be taken into consideration
when new development is proposed. The planning system plays an important
role in promoting the efficient use of land and considering and mitigating the
adverse impacts that development can have on third parties. However,
applying for planning permission places an administrative burden on
business, estimated at around ÂŁ1.1 billion in 2006. 16
Where a development has little or limited adverse impact, or the impacts can
be controlled in a way that does not require assessment of each individual
proposal, the requirement to obtain planning permission can place burdens on
business and others that are out of proportion with the potential impacts of the
development.
The planning system aims to achieve proportionality by exercising different
degrees of control over types of development with different degrees of impact.
The requirement for local authority scrutiny of proposals with little or limited
adverse impact is removed using permitted development rights. Permitted
development rights are a deregulatory tool, established nationally, and use a
general impacts-based approach to grant automatic planning permission for
development that complies with limitations and conditions that are set out in
the Parts to Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) Order 1995. The 1995 Order has been amended several times
as new rights have been added or existing rights have been changed.
Policy issue under consideration and objectives
The policy issue under consideration is whether the thresholds that govern the
available permitted development rights for householder extensions and
certain non-domestic extensions and new buildings could be increased for a
limited period. This would allow more development to take place without the
requirement for local authority planning permission and provide an incentive
for developers to carry out works in the short term, rather than delay. There
would be benefits for businesses who carry out development and businesses
wishing to expand. There are also potential growth benefits where
development takes place that would not otherwise have done so due to the
requirement to obtain local authority planning permission.
Superfast broadband is key to boosting economic growth, increasing
competitiveness and creating jobs. Government has a target to have the best
superfast broadband in Europe by 2015. Accordingly, Government has
allocated ÂŁ530 million to help take superfast broadband to rural areas and and
is keen to incentivise faster roll out by easing the planning consideration of
associated development.

The relevant parts of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 that are being considered are:
•
•
•
•
•

Part 1 (Development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse)
Part 8 (Industrial and warehouse development)
Part 24 (Development by electronic communications code operators)
Part 41 (Office buildings)
Part 42 (Shops or catering, financial or professional services
establishments)

The policy objective is to deregulate by removing more development from the
requirement for detailed local authority assessment of proposals by increasing
the permitted development thresholds for householder extensions and certain
non-domestic extensions and new buildings for a three year period. In
addition, for broadband deployment, the objective is to remove the
requirement for prior approval for electronic communications apparatus in
protected areas, excluding Sites of Special Scientific Interest, for a period of
five years. These policies are deregulatory measures.
The intended effects of the proposal are to reduce the burden of the planning
system on homeowners and business, and boost growth. Specific effects
include:
•

•

•
•

A boost for growth by incentivising developers to carry out work in the
short term, rather than delaying, and where development takes place that
would not otherwise have done so due to the requirement to obtain local
authority planning permission.
Benefits for businesses who carry out development and businesses
wishing to expand. Business will no longer be required to prepare planning
applications for certain development. Business will also make fee savings
from no longer submitting planning applications.
Reducing the need for local authority assessment of development with
more limited impacts to allow them to concentrate on larger development
of more strategic benefit to their local area.
Fast tracking the roll out of superfast broadband.

Current position
Presently, development that exceeds the existing thresholds set out in the
relevant part of the Order is likely to require an application for planning
permission, with an associated fee and other costs payable by the applicant.
The requirement for planning permission can be seen as one of the
disincentives to undertake development, particularly at the margins where the
perceived benefits of the development are relatively low.
Options for change
Two options are considered.

23

Option 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; do nothing: make no changes to permitted development rights.
Option 2 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; deregulate by increasing the permitted development thresholds for
householder extensions and certain non- domestic extensions and new
buildings. For broadband deployment, remove the requirement for prior
approval for electronic communications apparatus in protected areas. The
detailed proposals are:
Householder extensions (Part 1)
At present, the permitted development rights in Part 1 allow single-storey rear
extensions (including conservatories) of 4m depth from the rear wall for a
detached house, and 3m for any other type of house. We propose that outside
of protected areas (such as conservation areas, National Parks, Areas of
Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest) these
thresholds should be extended to 8m for a detached house, and 6m for any
other type of house for a three year period. Other limitations and conditions in
Part 1 would still apply to reduce the risk of adverse impacts on neighbouring
properties and the wider area. This includes requirements on the height of
development. The feasibility of making it easier to convert garages to
habitable accommodation is also being explored.
Extensions to shops and financial/professional services establishments
(Part 42)
Shops and financial/professional services establishments are currently able to
extend their premises by up to 50m2, provided that this does not increase the
gross floor space of the original building by more than 25%, and provided that
the extension is no higher than 4m. We propose that outside of protected
areas, these limits should be raised to 100m2 and 50% for a three year period.
We also propose that they should be able to build up to the boundary of the
premises, except where the boundary is with a residential property. Other
limitations and conditions would still apply.
Office extensions (Part 41)
Offices are currently able to extend their premises by up to 50m2, provided
that this does not increase the gross floor space of the original building by
more than 25%, and subject to various other limitations. We propose that
outside of protected areas, these limits should be raised to 100m2 and 50%
for a three year period. Other limitations and conditions would still apply.
Industrial and warehouse buildings (Part 8)
At present, new industrial buildings or warehouses which are up to 100m2 in
size can be built within the curtilage of an existing industrial building or
warehouse, provided that the floor space of the original building would not be
exceeded by more than 25% in non-protected areas. We propose that in nonprotected areas, these limits should be raised to 200m2 and 50% for a three
year period.
Development to facilitate the roll out of broadband (Part 24)
At present, under part 24 of the General Permitted Development Order, fixed
broadband apparatus such as cabinets, telegraph poles, and overhead lines
24

have permitted development rights, which means they can be installed without
the need to apply for planning permission. This is subject to a prior approval
process on article 1(5) land which allows planning authorities to consider the
siting and appearance of communications apparatus before development
commences. These permitted development rights liberalise the planning
system and allow for speedier deployment of communications infrastructure,
although the prior approval process can create uncertainty for developers and
prolong the time taken on installation. We propose to remove this prior
approval requirement as it applies to article 1(5) land. This change will be for
a period of five years.
Option 2 is preferred as it would meet the policy objectives outlined above.
Consultation
A consultation exercise will be used to test the appropriateness of the
proposals and also identify whether that are further opportunities to
deregulate in respect of garage conversions.
Sectors and groups affected
The main sectors and groups most likely to be affected by the proposal are:
•

Home and business owners wishing to extend their property (particularly
those who are encouraged to do so through reduced planning costs)

•

Businesses that carry out development work on behalf of home and
business owners wishing to extend their property

•

Businesses that install broadband equipment

•

Planning services/staff at local authorities who will determine fewer
applications for planning permission

•

Third parties who live or work in the vicinity of new development

•

Society more widely is likely to benefit from economic growth and
broadband rollout

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Option 1 - ‘Do nothing’ scenario
The planning application process would continue to apply for those who do
not meet the thresholds to benefit from permitted development rights. Those
wishing to develop outside existing thresholds would continue to pay planning
fees and the administrative costs of making a planning application, and these

25

costs may deter development and the growth and other benefits associated
with Option 2.
Option 2 – Changing the permitted development thresholds
In making the assessment of costs and benefits it is important to distinguish
between:
(1) planning applications that would have happened under the ‘do nothing’
scenario and therefore benefit from administration and fee savings
related to the application process; and
(2) those cases where development would not have occurred but for this
policy change, i.e. where the economic costs imposed by the planning
system were sufficient to prevent development at the margin.
We identify and describe all sources of costs and benefits below and have
attempted to quantify these using illustrative scenarios wherever this is
possible.
Costs and savings for householder applicants
Householder applicants who intended to develop before the changes, and
meet the increased thresholds will save directly on the £150 cost of the
planning application fee that will no longer apply as the development is
permitted development. There will also be indirect savings on transaction
costs such as professional fees, production of scaled drawings, time spent
compiling and presenting information etc. The estimated total savings on the
planning application process (including fee) is between £150 and £2470 17
depending on the level of information required to support the application. If the
requirement to seek planning permission were removed these costs would no
longer be incurred.
In the year ending March 2012 18 there were just under 195,000 decisions on
‘householder development’ applications. If we assume that 10-20% of these
would fall within permitted development rights after the policy change,
between 20,000 and 40,000 developments would no longer be subject to
planning requirements. It should be noted that these figures represent a
tentative estimate. It is likely that a proportion of the 195,000 decisions
involved applications for development within a National Park or conservation
area etc, and these developments will be unaffected by the policy changes
proposed.
Under this illustrative scenario – between 10% and 20% of existing
householder developments no longer require an application – the saving to
applicants might range between £5m and £100m annually.
17

There will be further benefit from householders who were previously deterred
from development by the cost of preparation and submission of a planning
application. Householders may now choose to develop their homes. It is not
possible to estimate the number of applicants that are currently deterred from
making changes to their homes because of the economic costs the planning
system imposes.
Table 1 shows a range of construction output that may result from this
additional development based on construction cost, floor area and illustrative
take-up assumptions.
Table 1: Construction Output (illustrative)
Additional
Unit Floor Construction
Extensions
Area (sqm) Cost
(per
19
sqm)
Low
10,000
40
£750
High
20,000
40
£750

Construction
Output
£300,000,000
£600,000,000

Under these illustrative scenarios, the additional annual construction output
ranges between £300m and £600m.
Costs and savings for business and other organisations wishing to
carry out development under Parts 8, 41 and 42 to Schedule 2 of the
Town and Country Planning Order 1995, and meeting the increased size
thresholds
Businesses and other organisations intending to develop (that would have
done so in the absence of permitted development rights) but also now
meeting the increased thresholds will make direct fee savings from submitting
a reduced number of planning applications being required. They will also save
on the associated transaction costs such as professional fees, production of
scaled drawings, time spent compiling and presenting information etc. If the
requirement to seek planning permission were removed these costs would no
longer be incurred.
In 2011/12 there were 9,600 planning applications for minor development in
‘offices/research and development/light industry’ and ‘retail distribution and
servicing’ categories. 20 Only a proportion of these applications will be for
extensions that will be covered by the proposed permitted development rights:
if we assume that between 10% and 20% of these applications fall within
permitted development rights following the proposed policy changes, between
960 and 1,920 developments will no longer be subject to planning
requirements.

19

Based on an assumed construction cost in a range of £500- £1000 per sqm.
DCLG (2006) Householder Consents - Survey of Applicants:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/151327.pdf
20

27

In 2011/12 there were 2,200 applications for minor development in ‘general
industry/storage/warehouse’ categories. 21 Once again, only a proportion of
these will be covered by the proposed permitted development rights:
assuming that 10-20% of these applications will be covered by permitted
development rights under the proposed policy changes, then between 220
and 440 developments will no longer be subject to planning requirements.
The administration and fee savings on the above applications will vary
depending on the size. Given that these applications are for business
premises, the cost savings from no longer preparing (time and resource) and
submitting (fees) are likely to accrue to business. Table 2 shows the
application savings based on the illustrative scenarios set out above.
Table 2: Application administrative and fee savings

As before, there is likely to some additional economic activity as a result of
development that would not otherwise have come forward due to the
perceived cost of the planning system. It is not possible to estimate the
number of business applicants that are currently deterred from development
because of the economic costs the planning system imposes.
Table 3 shows the additional construction output under illustrative scenarios
for additional development. These are based upon assumed floor area and
construction costs.
Table 3: Construction output (illustrative)
Additional
Unit Floor
Construction Cost (per
Construction
Extensions
Area (sqm)
sqm) 24
Output
Low
500
200
£1,250
£125,000,000
High
1,000
200
£1,250
£250,000,000
Under these illustrative scenarios, the additional annual construction output
ranges between £125m and £250m.

21

DCLG (2006) Householder Consents - Survey of Applicants:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/151327.pdf
22
Based on Arup (2009) and the costs for dwelling house extensions, it is estimated that planning
process costs are in a range between £170 and £2540.
23
Arup (2009) estimate the costs of preparing and submitting a warehouse development range between
£3,500 and £36,500.23 This cost is based on developments of under 1,000m² so applications for under
100m² are likely to be at the lowest end of the range.
24
Based on an assumed construction cost range between £1000 and £1500 per sqm.

28

Development to facilitate the roll out of broadband
Firms seeking to make installations as part of the roll out of superfast
broadband in protected areas, for example Areas of Outstanding Natural
Beauty, conservation areas, heritage sites etc, but not including Sites of
Special Scientific Interest, for a limited period of five years will no longer be
required to engage in a lengthy prior approval process. As a result there will
be direct administration savings. Arup (2009) estimate the costs of preparing
a submitting a prior approval application ranges between £1,410 and
£4,335 25 .
Businesses are also likely to benefit from access to superfast broadband.
Construction businesses
Businesses which carry out construction work are also likely to benefit from
increased economic activity.
Costs and benefits for local authorities
Local authorities will benefit from a reduced number of planning applications,
freeing up resources to be employed elsewhere. However, they will also now
not receive the fee income associated with having to assess the planning
applications that they previously would have received, which is designed to
cover the full costs of determining the planning application.
There may be an increased number of enquiries by homeowners and their
neighbours relating to whether new development meets the conditions laid out
in the permitted development rights. This could impose some administrative
costs on local planning authorities in terms of dealing with these queries.
However, even in the absence of these permitted development rights, the
local planning authority would receive pre-application enquiries regarding their
policies and their views of development proposals. It is therefore considered
that the permitted development rights would result in a transfer of resources
from dealing with planning application queries to permitted development
rights’ queries that will broadly net out overall.
Costs and benefits to neighbours and communities
Third parties living and working close to new development that proceeds
under permitted development rights at the higher thresholds may consider
that amenity has been unduly impacted on as a result of the proposals. This
could be, for example, due to perceived harmful visual impact or loss of light
resulting from the development.
It is proposed to minimise this risk by maintaining appropriate limitations and
conditions that will need to be met for the permitted development rights to
apply. Other non-planning related protections will also still apply, including the
Party Wall Act and the ‘right to light’.

25

Arup (2009) Benchmarking the cost of submitting a planning application:

If, in exceptional circumstances, it is clearly demonstrated that the permitted
development rights are materially harmful in a particular locality, local
authorities are able to consult with their communities on using an Article 4
direction to withdraw the rights. Removal of the rights in these exceptional
circumstances allows all the potential planning impacts of the development to
be considered locally by requiring planning applications.
Communities may benefit from increased economic activity in their area.
Construction work supports local employment in trades such as building and
plumbing, as well as the businesses that provide materials to them and others
in the supply chain. For example, every additional ÂŁ1m of output in housing
repairs and maintenance supports around 30 jobs (in gross terms).
Impact on small firms
There may be positive impacts for small firms wishing to expand their
premises or involved in the construction business. In addition small firms
involved in the supply chains of these firms could benefit.
Rural proofing
The proposals for householder and business extensions will not apply in
protected areas, including National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Beauty.
As these landscape designations are generally rural areas, the policy has the
potential to exclude home and business owners in these areas. There is a
need to strike an appropriate balance between deregulating and maintain
appropriate protections, particularly in those sensitive areas where tighter
controls are needed as development can have a disproportionate impact on
the quality and character of the natural and built landscape.
Effective, reliable and fast communications are vital for the economic
prosperity and social sustainability of rural England. The proposals to facilitate
the roll out of superfast broadband will boost growth in rural areas, and has
the potential to make services more accessible to rural communities.
Implementation
If these proposals are adopted, an amendment will be made to the Town and
Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995.
Monitoring
The proposed extensions to homeowner and business permitted development
rights are a temporary measure for three years. A light touch review of the
policy will be undertaken towards the end of this period to establish how best
to proceed. Similarly, a light touch review of the broadband changes will be
undertaken towards the end of the five year period.